I was thinking about this with regard to the recent stir over the license plate COPSLIE. I am generally very good when it comes to reading vanity plates, but when I saw those letters, I parsed it into Cop Slie, which made no sense at all. I think I did not see it as Cops Lie because, unlike the person requesting that plate, my experience of cops is that, as a rule, they do not lie.

But that started me thinking about my cousin's old vanity plate. He wanted something that would represent him and his wife of 50 years, so he went for their combined initials. His initials are LGB and his wife is called Tit Tante, for the French, little Aunt. Putting that all together, he requested the license plate: LGBTT, which he received without comment from the DMV. He immediately noticed a huge uptick in the attention he received while driving around. People he did not know would roll down their windows and give him a thumbs up, or they would fire off unfriendly, rude gestures. In parking lots, while he was walking from his car, some people would smile and wave. Others chased after him, yelling and cursing at him. And he really had no idea why, and never connected this attention with the new license plate.

Someone finally pointed out to him that his plate had a whole other meaning. In case you are as clueless as he was, or are very bad at deciphering vanity plates, those letters more typically represent the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transsexual, Transgender coalition, an organization supporting the human and civil rights of those communities.

After figuring this out, my cousin was more amused than anything else, but as he does not relish a lot of public attention, he returned the plate. In fact, he returned it the same day he learned about this other interpretation and would not leave the DMV until they gave him a new plate. While he is supportive of the LGBTT movement, he did not want to be their unsolicited representative.

With regard to freedom of speech, I wondered if the person who issued the plate was as unaware as my cousin of this other reading of LGBTT. I thought perhaps the issuer knew my cousin and recognized his initials. My cousin lives in a very small state, after all. If the issuer had known and mentioned this to my cousin, he says he would not have gotten that plate. But what if someone else did want that plate in order to bring voice to the gay movement, and the issuer understood that intent, disapproved and said no? Would this have ended up in court? If it had been up to me, I would likely have approved the COPSLIE plate because I would not have read it as Cops Lie and, if I had, I would not have thought much about it. I think it is pretty clear that the issuer cannot be the one to make such decisions.

I believe the court was right in its decision to allow the plate, but it should have never gotten that far. Instead of ending up in court, what if these incidents become portals that open up discussion rather than barriers that shut it down. Not everyone I know agrees with the court's decision and that has led to some animated discussions in my home. So instead of turning this into the proverbial "federal case," let's take advantage of these opportunities to think beyond ourselves. Instead of casting stones at someone with a point of view that we find offensive, let's ask of ourselves, why does this illicit this reaction in me? Our reactions are much more about us than they are about the situation that provokes the reaction. At least we did not have to deal with the advertising phrase banned in Britain: "Sofa King Low Prices." Who knew? (If you don't, Google it.) Would you ban it?

Kate Murray of New Castle serves on civic, arts and governmental boards at the state and local level. She can be reached at dynportsmouth@gmail.com.